Изображения страниц

of the people, and not by that increase of severity which had been just recommended. Mr. Secretary Peel said, there were two propositions before the House-that for the continuation of the law, and the amendment. Besides these, there were the recommendations of his noble friend who spoke last but one. He would defend that noble lord from any personal imputation, in consequence of the proposal which he had made; but he could not accede to that proposal. He would not have the coercion, enforced by this act, either increased or diminished. He considered it under existing circumstances a necessary measure; but, at the same time, he regarded it only as a temporary one. He thought that martial law should not be introduced but under the most urgent circumstances; and he therefore deprecated all allusion to it. It was beneath the dignity of parliament to hold out threats which it did not mean to put in execution. It had been complained on the other side of the House, that government had resorted to measures of coercion for the last twenty years, He would appeal to every candid man, whether every measure which had been suggested for the relief of Ireland had not been attended to with the utmost anxiety. It had been alleged that partiality existed in the appointment of sheriffs. The first act of the administration with which he was connected, had been to assimilate it as much as possible with the practice of England. Similar measures had been taken with respect to grand juries, the powers of which were said to be abused. The illicit distilleries were, at another time, alleged to be the cause of some of the disturbances. This had been partly remedied by the consolidation of the exchequers, and would be still further relieved. He sincerely believed that most of the evils which at this moment disturbed Ireland sprang from the maladministration of the common law of the land. So highly did he think of that law, that he had no doubt if it were vigorously and impartially administered, there would be no necessity for recurring to other means. It was for this reason that he wished to see the magistrates aided by an active and responsible body of police. The deficiency of magistrates had also been alleged as one cause of the disorders. This, too, had received the attention of the government. The lists of the various counties had been made out, for the purpose of revising them, and this

work was now going on alphabetically. Believing that early intercourse between Catholics and Protestants, and their receiving the same education, without any reference to religious differences, would have a happy effect in allaying discords and dissensions, he had, when he was in Ireland, endeavoured to form a society for this purpose. That endeavour had been to a certain extent successful; and, unless he was misinformed, a sum of 9,000l. had been this year added to the available funds of the society. Thus he had attempted to show the House that every measure, with the exception of Catholic emancipation, had been tried for the purpose of ameliorating the condition of Ireland. Did the noble lord think that the inquiry which he suggested could lead to any practical result. The extension of education in Ireland, and the improvement of the linen-trade, were doubtless impórtant objects; but would it be desirable to take them into consideration together with twenty other things at the same time? The House had a very fair specimen of Irish inquiry in the one which was now going on relative to the sheriff of Dublin. If that inquiry had taken up so much time, what would the House say to an inquiry into the whole of the laws of Ire land, and the manner of their administration? With regard to Catholic emancipation, if it could be proved to him that it would cure all the evils of Ireland,.he would accede to it; but he well knew that it would not have that effect, unless something were granted to the Catholics, which he was not prepared to concede. If the Protestant religion was to be maintained in Ireland, as the religion of the state, then Catholic emancipation would not be the basis of tranquillity. It might produce further contention; but it would not produce safety. He had heard that emancipation would not satisfy the Catholics, without a change in the mode of supporting the Catholic clergy. He hoped, however, that the Protestant religion would be maintained. He should be sorry to see the Catholic, the established religion of Ireland. At the same time, he would not wish for any thing which would be hurtful to the feelings of the majority of the people. He would propose a strict admi nistration of justice, and the preservation of their rights, both to Protestants and to Catholics. He trusted he had shewn that Catholic emancipation would not tranquillize Ireland any more than the other

measures which had been proposed; and that as under the present circumstances of the country the Insurrection act was absolutely necessary, so it would be continued.

tection; but he maintained, that if it were wished effectually to put down the existing evils in Ireland, measures of a very different character were indispensable. The state of Ireland at the present moment was most alarming. He was persuaded, that nothing but the presence of a military force prevented the Irish people from using the arms which they had obtained by night, in open day and in open rebellion. A reduction of rents and a commutation of tithes were among the measures indispensable to the restoration of order in Ireland. But, all that was done should be done firmly, and without affording the slightest ground for the belief, that it was obtained by intimidation. It was most desirable to use the approaching summer season for the purpose of pro

Mr. Spring Rice contended, in opposition to the assertions of the right hon. gentleman, that, dividing the interval since the Union into two periods, the latter commencing with the administration of the marquis Wellesley, there had not been, in the former period, any thing done by the government, worth mentioning, for the tranquillization of Ireland. It was not by Insurrection acts that that desirable object was to be secured. Something must be done in the south of Ireland to give increased means of employment to the people, or they must be enabled to emigrate to seek employment else-viding against the occurrence of those where. The increase of local taxation was an evil of great magnitude. It was hardly credible, that, within the last ten years, the local taxation of the city of Dublin had increased from 2,400l. to 27,000l. per annum. Though he approved of the amendment, he should give his reluctant support to the Insurrection act, because he felt that withdrawing it at the present time might give countenance to the disaffected, and weaken the efforts of the magistracy.

Mr. V. Fitzgerald supported the original proposition, and defended the conduct of the different governments of Ireland, who, he contended, had used their best efforts to tranquillize that unfortunate country. He expressed his astonishment, after the manner in which that House and the people of England had commiserated and relieved the distresses of Ireland, to hear it asserted that Ireland had only known England in her coercive character. The misfortunes of Ireland were to be attributed, not to the conduct of those by whom she had been governed, but to moral causes, which no government could effectually control.


Mr. P. Moore said, he had uniformly opposed this bill, and must continue to do With all the exertions of all the governments of Ireland, that country was now in a ten times worse state than ever. Instead of passing this act, he would rather throw the marquis Wellesley upon his own resources, by giving him a discretionary power to act as he thought fit. Mr. Becher, if he could get nothing better, was bound to support the measure, bad as it was, as one of necessary pro

dreadful outrages which it was to be feared would otherwise break out in the next winter. Adverting to the recent measures, having for their object the purification of the magistracy, he expressed his doubt of their efficacy; knowing, as he did, that in many places efficient magistrates had been removed, and inefficient ones substituted. He would vote for the amendment in the first place; and, if that should be disposed of negatively, he would then vote for the original motion.

Grenfell, P.
Gordon, R.
Griffith, J. W.
Haldimand, W.
Heron, sir W.
Hill, lord A.
Hobhouse, J. C.

Hume, J.

Hornby, E.

Hutchinson, hon. C.H.

James, W.

Jervoise, G. P.

Kennedy, J. F.

The House divided: For the original
motion 162. For the amendment 82.
List of the Minority.
Abercrombie, hon. J.
Allen, J. H.
Baring, sir T.
Barrett, S. M.
Barnard, vis.
Becher, W. W.
Bennet, hon. H. G.
Bentinck, lord W.
Benyon, B.
Byng, G.
Carter, John
Caulfield, hon. H.
Cavendish, H.
Clifton, visc.
Chaloner, R.
Colborne, N. R.
Creevy, T.
Davies, T.
Denison, W. J.
Denman, T.
Duncannon, visc.
Ellice, E.
Fergusson, sir R.
Folkestone, visc.
Foley, J. H.
Glenorchy, visc.
Grattan, J.

Johnson, W. A.

Knight, R.

Lamb, hon. G.
Langston, J. H.
Latouche, R.
Leycester, R.
Leader, W.
Maberly, J.
Maberly, W. L.
Martin, J.
Milbank, M.

Maxwell, J. W.

Milton, visc.

Monck, J. B.

[blocks in formation]


Wednesday, May 14.

FOREIGN WOOL TAX-SIR J. SINCLAIR'S PETITION AGAINST THE REPEAL OF.] Sir J. Sebright presented a petition from sir J. Sinclair, praying that the duties on foreign wool might not be repealed. He stated, that the petitioner felt convinced that if he could have an opportunity of exhibiting to the House the fine cloths which he had caused to be manufactured from English wool, it would go a great way towards convincing them how needless the importation of foreign wool was. It had been proposed to him to bring down a piece of cloth with the petition, and to cause it to be laid upon the table, for the inspection of members. To this he had replied, that the proposition was not a regular one. But there was another course, to which there could be no objection, and that was, for the petitioner to present him with a coat of the finest cloth made from English wool, in which costume he would appear before the House on presenting the petition. The proposition being acceded to, he was enabled to appear before them, as they now beheld him, and he trusted in no very discreditable condition. He begged leave to bring up the petition; and when he had committed it to the care of the House, he should wait a reasonable time in the lobby, to give those gentlemen who wished to satisfy themselves upon the subject, an opportunity for examination.

Ordered to lie on the table.

SHERIFF OF DUBLIN-INQUIRY INTO HIS CONDUCT] The House having again resolved itself into a committee to inquire into the conduct of the sheriff of Dublin, sir Robert Heron in the chair,

Mr. William Lewis was called in; and

By Colonel Barry.—What is your situation? -I am an attorney by profession.

Do you recollect going shortly after the riots to the gaol of Newgate?—I do. I was called upon to go to the gaol of Newgate, to see if I could identify any of the prisoners that were in custody for the riot at the theatre.

Who went with you?-Major Tandy. I was shown the yard in which the prisoners were. I did not point out any person there, that threw the rattle; but I did point out the person of a man, who answered the description of the person, that I thought threw the rattle from the gallery.

Did you ever afterwards hear who that person was?-I never saw until I saw it in the papers at Shrewsbury.

It was not George Graham ?—I do not know that it was not George Graham.

You did not point out a person that you thought was the person who threw the rattle?

I did in this way; the man that I thought threw the rattle, was a man dressed in a particular garb, and the dress of that man answered my view of him in the gallery; but I could not identify his person.

Were you told afterwards, that that was not the man?—I was not; I was told that he was not then a prisoner.

Do you recollect afterwards being shown Graham ?-I believe I do.

And you did not identify him?-Certainly

[blocks in formation]

By Mr. Brownlow.-Did you attend the grand jury in January last, under the impression, that bills of capital indictment were to be preferred before you ?-Public rumour spoke to that effect, and I knew nothing to the contrary, until the counsel for the crown stated, that bills would not be sent up capitally; the general impression was so, certainly.

Were you aware that certain prisoners were committed capitally, for the play-house riot?— Such was the public report of the legal proceedings; I knew nothing until I heard it declared by the judge, that it had been withdrawn in a negative kind of way; I can answer that the court declared that the capital charge had been withdrawn. Until after the counsel for the crown declared that it was withdrawn, my impression was, that we were to try a capital offence.

Were not the jury sworn before the counsel for the crown stated that?—I cannot undertake

to say whether it was before or after, but I be--I heard so, I have no reason to disbelieve lieve after.

Did you attend in court under that impression? Certainly I did.

The right hon. William Conyngham Plunkett

was further examined in his place,


Do not you conceive that would be an additional cause of irritation?—I certainly should contemplate it as one.

Have you ever seen the almanack for the year 1823-I have, or rather the chronicle which is placed at the close of the almanack; it is bound up with the almanack.

A sort of annals of Dublin?—Yes.
That is furnished to the different offices at the

By Colonel Barry.-Do you recollect the petit juries that were impanelled for the trials of the ribbon-men, in the beginning of November term last?-I recollect that there were petit juries impanelled for the trial of some ribbon-expense of government, is it not?—It is. It is men, but I do not recollect who they were.

Do you recollect whether you challenged on the part of the crown, any, or how many, of the persons so on the panel?-I am almost certain there were challenges made on the part of the crown; how many, I cannot recollect.

Do you recollect the name of Barrett Wadden? -I recollect his name perfectly.

Do you recollect that he was the only challenge made on the part of the crown on that occasion?-I do not recollect that his name was called; I did not recollect having heard his name till the present occasion.

You stated on a former day, that you had seen the rules and regulations and extracts from the books of the Orange societies, would you have the goodness to state whether it was previous to, or subsequent to, the riot at the theatre, that you saw those extracts?---Certainly subsequent; I never had communication with the person from whom I received them, till long subsequent to the riot at the theatre. John Crosby Graves, esq. called in; and further examined

By Colonel Barry.-Were not you examined before the grand jury, as a witness upon the bills of indictment sent up in January last ?—I


[ocr errors]

stated to be published by authority.

Did you ever see the account of the business of the theatre, as affixed to those annals as published by authority?—I did see two versions. One of the copies contained one reading of it, and another another, varying in the phrase. I recollect one stating that on the night of the riot at the theatre, a heavy piece of timber, and another stating that a heavy log of wood, was thrown at his excellency.

What did it say besides the piece of wood?— A quart bottle, I believe.

Did it not state a certain description of persons it was thrown by ?-Assassins, I think.

And they added that he providentially escaped its taking effect ?-I think that was the


You were at the theatre that night?—Yes.

Did you see such a heavy piece of timber, or heavy log of wood thrown at the lord lieutenant on that night ?—No; I believe that occurrence, whatever it was, took place while I was in the act of taking Mr. Forbes, whom I had apprehended by myself and another magistrate in conjunction with me, from the theatre, to the watch-house; I believe it occurred just in that interval, I did not see it.

Do you believe there was ever such a thing thrown-I do believe a piece of timber; as What was the conduct of the grand jury to to the weight of it, I have a pretty correct you; did they behave with courtesy and fair-notion, but I can have no doubt that a piece ness to you in your examination ?-I conceive of timber was thrown; I saw it produced so. certainly. upon the trial, and I saw it in the policeoffice.

They showed no disrespect or impatience during your examination ?-Certainly not.

measured it. It was precisely the head of such a rattle, as is bought in the toy-shops to go to a masquerade; less than a watchman's rattle, it weighed eight ounces and a half.

Did it deserve the appellation of a heavy Have the goodness to state any thing which log of timber?—I think that was an exaggercomes within the question put to you?-Onation. I saw it in the police-office, and then going into the grand-jury room, a statement was made to me; "it is unnecessary to interrogate you, Mr. Graves; you will have the goodness to state what evidence you think material which you can give." I did make such a statement of the facts within my knowledge, and the jury heard them with courtesy and politeness.

Do you recollect, at any period subsequent to the 4th of November, the persons that were around the statue being dispersed by the military, and some persons being wounded in that transaction?—I recollect hearing of the circumstance.

Have you any doubt that some persons dressing the statue were dispersed by military force, without any orders from the civil power? VOL. IX.

Was it proposed to you at any time, or in any place, to sign any informations respecting the persons who were accused of rioting at the theatre, or of conspiring to kill and murder the lord lieutenant, without having the informant before you, or without examining him as to the facts stated in his information?-No; it never was proposed to us to swear those informations at all, until subsequently to the committals, when we had the witnesses before us, and when we were directed to have the witnesses before us in the first instance; we had, at the police-office, before us, in the ordi


nary course, several witnesses appear, who had made informations before us in the ordinary course; they were taken in the usual way, the party was attested to them, and the jurat subscribed by the magistrate, and the party bound over to prosecute, but there were other witnesses who went to the castle, who did not come to the police-office, who made statements which were taken in the shape of notes, but some of them attested by a magistrate, but we did not see them at all, till they were sent down to us to be attested, in the shape of informations; the witnesses were then brought before us, and interrogated as to the facts; they then ultimately subscribed them, and were bound over to attend the commission.

Are you to be understood, there were no informations before the committals ?-I have stated, that there were some informations in the police-office, one of the principal ones against Forbes I had myself signed; others were sworn before other magistrates; but there was a great body of other examinations not at all before us.

Did you, in any case, refuse or decline to sign any information on any account?—No.

Any committal?—I stated the facts, with respect to the committals, upon the last occasion; I did put over on another magistrate in my office the duty of signing the committal, for the reasons which I stated on my last examination; and in point of fact, I did not sign any committal.

Was it proposed to you at any time, or in any place, to sign any informations respecting the persons who were accused of rioting at the theatre, or of conspiring to kill and murder the lord lieutenant, without having the informant before you, or without examining him as to the facts stated in his information ?—I have before said no.

Were you ever called upon to attest any information which you were not suffered to read?-No.

By Mr. J. Daly.-You were at the theatre on the night of the riot ?—Yes.

When you were there, were you inclined to believe there was any attempt at assassination? -I can state the facts that I saw, I did not see the bottle till it was held up; it was held up, and there was a cry of shame; I did not see the fact of the bottle striking, that circumstance induced me to leave the part of the house where I was, intending to go the gallery to from whence the bottle was thrown; in so doing, I observed that the noise and disturbance, the riot as I considered it, extended to the boxes, in those boxes I apprehended an individual, one of three in the act of using whistles; I took that individual to the watchhouse, and it was during my absence from the house, that the rattle, the piece of timber was thrown.

While you were at the theatre, did you conceive there was a plan or a plot for assassination ?-No.

You were absent at the time the rattle was

thrown?-I conceive so, for when I came back I heard a voice addressing the house from the middle gallery, adverting to that circumstance as having taken place; and it did not take place before I left the house.

By Sir J. Newport.-How long have you been in the magistracy ?-Between eight and nine years.

Have you ever known any disturbance occasioned on the ceremonies of dressing the statue, by firing off guns and pistols in the streets, and alarming the inhabitants of College-green and its vicinity ?--I have reason to know that the thing took place, that there was noise and letting off of guns; and confusion, and a crowd of people assembled, some of whom felt disapprobation, and some appro


Were any of the depositions laid before the grand jury?—I believe not; they are not, according to the existing law, laid before the grand jury unless they are called for, which was not the case here.

Did you see any of the placards that were thrown about the theatre ?--I did.

What was printed on those placards?—A magistrate sitting in the box in which I did, alderman Darley, left the box, on an intimation of what appeared on one of those placards, and went up with a view to ascertain who had distributed them; that he failed in; he came down, and showed me three of them; on one of them there is printed, "No Popery;" on another, "The Protestants want Talbot, as the Papists have got all-but;" and "Fleming though he has got the mace, may find it hard to hold his place;" another was, Ex-governor of the bantams must change his morning-tone."

[ocr errors]

By Dr. Lushington.-During the eight or uine years you have been a magistrate, did you ever receive orders to prevent any riot or disturbance on the day on which the statue has been usually dressed?—I have not received them, but such orders have been given.

Do you know that any riot or disturbance ever took place on the day when the statue was dressed?-Nothing that I know of, of any importance, until the July immediately preceding its being discontinued; I did hear of such a thing occurring on July 1822, that there was something of riot, a good deal of confusion and one or two persons hurt.

Christopher Galloghly called in; and

By Colonel Barry-What is your situation? -A peace officer attached to the head policeoffice in Dublin.

Were you a witness before the grand jury, in January 1823 ?—I was.

How did the grand jury conduct themselves towards you when under examination ?As I conceive, as a grand jury ought to do.

Was it with civility and patience?—Yes.
They heard your whole story?—Yes.
Did anything whatever offensive happen to

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »